Striking a balance between musicality and resolution
As my years and experience in this hobby continue to grow I notice a divergence between those seeking extreme resolution and detail from their music reproduction systems and those in search of maximum musicality.
In theory, high-end audio systems should provide more than garden variety stereo systems. In my view that means more detail and information should be heard from a high-end music reproduction system than one hears from ordinary HiFi stereo systems set ups. BUT is there such thing as too much resolution and detail in a stereo system’s sound presentation?
Some people feel that a less detailed presentation that is easier for your brain to process has better flow and provides more enjoyable listening.
So there is the dichotomy. Should one pay more to hear less? Can a frequency response performance that is curtailed at both frequency extremes be desired and praised?
Those that seek a “more musical” presentation usually point to their belief that that is how they hear live un-amplified acoustic music in the real world. In nature, high frequencies attenuate and decay with distance from the source and sound waves get absorbed, diffracted, reflected, and diffused by the environmental factors and landscapes; so they are not wrong in stating that in the real world the sound of music is less detailed and extended. The issue is that when we listen to our music reproduction systems at home we are not listening to live un-amplified music in a concert venue, but rather professionally produced audio recordings typically recorded with close-microphones techniques.
So the question is, do we want our systems to reproduce the sound on the commercial audio recordings accurately or does one want hear the sound the way one thinks that it should sound?
Lucky for me, I have enough systems at home that I have been able to design, set up, and tune them for different targeted resultant sound, sound presentation, and sound qualities. For instance, my OKTAN6 ultimate horn system is a dissecting microscope, my Pinnacle horn system aims at extreme musicality, and my WAAR reference system is a chameleon, which can be adjusted to sound exactly how you want it to sound in real-time.
My “test-bed” system takes on the sound character and sound qualities of the components in use and it is excellent for evaluating what new components have to offer or bring to the table in terms of sound qualities. But with the Acapella TW-1S ION plasma super-tweeters extending the high frequencies, the TBI Emperor subwoofers extending the low frequencies, and the highly detailed & nuanced Digital Audio Denmark AX24 DSD dac streaming HQPLAYER as the source, the “Test Bed” system is a highly resolving system.
As with everything else in life, is there a happy medium or compromise that gives you the best of those worlds? I believe that there is and that great music reproduction systems can be tuned to strike a balance between musicality and resolution. If one listens to the evolution of my OKTAN6 ultimate horn system for instance you can hear that the fine tuning is driving the sound in that direction.
So during last night’s listening session I adjusted the sound of my “Test Bed” system to a more musical sound presentation. The “Test Bed” system is always in flux so it allows me to experiment, explore, tweak, tune, and have fun with it.
Here is an audio recording from last night’s listening session that captures the revised sound presentation and conveys the sound qualities that exemplify a more organic sound versus a more delineated & resolved sound presentation:
@carlos269 - like the pot calling the kettle black. We don’t strive for maximum, extreme, or balance, we strive for personal enjoyment
|
I like a lot of what you are saying. I also have a Physics degree. I have also worked in industry most of my career (some guest lectures at Stanford...). Spectroscopy and instruments derived from spectroscopy and optical detection are my main areas of interest. Most of what I've learned has counterparts in audio. I got back into audio about 7 years ago as my ability to pursue athletic goals has declined. I moved to a new house. I assembled my system there and didn't like the sound at all. So got REW and started characterizing my system. Gee, peaks and valleys everywhere! What to do? First attempt: get some traps (from Real Traps by Ethan Winer). I got enough to tame some of the resonances, although not enough to make the room acoustically dead. It helped, but I wanted more mid Bass/lower Midrange.. Stuck. I got a 1/3 octave graphic EQ. Worked great! I tuned my system for days to get flat FR (+/- 4 dB was the best I could do) from 20-20KHz. Didn't like it at all! After some reading and a lot of pondering, I decided to create an FR that gently slopes downward at about 1.5-1.8 dB/octave from 30Hz or so upward. This created the sound that resonates with me. Clearly, I'm more interested in musical than in detailed. (BTW: I realize that I could EQ more accurately with software derived filters. I've done that and was not pleased with the sound. I admit I have a very Analog bias.) I go to opera and concerts regularly. The sound created is purely acoustic. It reverberates in a room that has been expressly designed to create beautiful sound everywhere in that room. the sound of live music in this type of hall is quite blended, not detailed. My reference hall is the War Memorial Opera House in San Francisco. I was just there this last Sunday for an opera. I have attempted to recreate what I feel is that sound: slightly bass heavy, attenuated higher frequencies and a warm mid-range. I will never reach this goal, but I have gotten to a sound that I thoroughly enjoy. (BTW, this works very well for rock and jazz.) I realize that others may have different goals. I am so grateful that there are tools available today that allow us to fine tune the sound from audio systems to our individual taste. |
Dear @mahgister : With all respect and in good shape too the first timeI saw your Agon virtual system fullof resonators I really " laughing " for a few minutes because for me was " out of mine mind " by " ignorance " if you wish. After that first " entertaiment " I read some of your post and always posted the same with no audiophile real contribution in an audio forum where 100% of the gentlemans at least once post about a gear device:any when you never deven mention about. Post after repeated posts you already made and stated very clearly your " ideas " and in your virtual system you already posted your rules but never is enough foryou and follow posting exactly the same you are posted millions of times. Obviously that you are not tired with and that you will follow doing due that's your privilege and what makes you happy and where you feel are seated in your confort chair. Fine with me. I wish that some time I can learn something from you to improve my listen MUSIC sessions but I think that that never will happen because this is the last thread whereI be reading your same bla, bla, bla, bla,
R. As I posted in this thread:to each his own. |
@toddalin I’m not sure why this design suddenly came up in the context of this topic, but I just wanted to offer a few of my comments, for what it’s worth. First, I see the issue that the design chooses drivers with widely different impedances like 4 Ω for the tweeter, 16 Ω for the midrange, and 8 Ω for the woofer. Unless you have a very specific reason and are ready for a complex crossover design, this will create design challenges and is generally not recommended. On top of that, you also need to level the volume difference between the AMT and midrange using an L-pad or resistor network.
Makes the magic happen:
|
